Coexisting with Urban Red Foxes: Why there Is No Other Option (Article Series)

CLICK ON IMAGES TO SEE LARGER VERSIONS // MOUSE OVER TO READ CAPTIONS

Although the act usually comes from kind-heartedness or lack of education, feeding wildlife is more harmful than beneficial. From bears to foxes to squirrels, animals have been making recent headlines panhandling for easy snacks. There are many reasons why one should refrain from feeding wildlife, a few of which we will cover. Whereas The Canid Project focuses on members of the canid family, this is primarily based on the red fox, although many other species are in the limelight of this topic as well. So what is the big deal?

RED FOXES EXPLORE THEIR URBAN HABITAT IN SEARCH OF RESOURCES

Here is just a handful of the reasons why we need to let the wildlife be wild:

“But they look hungry sitting there staring, or walking up to my car”

They aren’t. They are very capable of feeding themselves without help. What these animals are doing is taking advantage of an easy meal in which they do not need. Making wildlife dependant on generosity only hurts them in the long run. Most people act in the moment, without thinking about long-term consequences their actions may have. Not to mention human food typically isn’t healthy for wildlife either, decreasing consumption of proper nutrients, which then can lead to health problems or disease.

A common trend also seems to be feeding wildlife from vehicles, throwing food out the window. Feeding foxes from cars does nothing but endanger them. Red foxes begin to associate vehicles as a moving refrigerators, ultimately losing their fear of them. As a result, they will begin approaching oncoming traffic. Modifying fox behaviour by conditioning them to approach vehicles for food, can cause accidents, if people swerve to avoid hitting them, or cause unnecessary injury to the animals. Not every traveler will share the same response as you, not everyone cares about wildlife. Unfortunately, red foxes fed from cars usually end up losing their lives to vehicle collisions.

FEEDING FOXES FROM CARS IS DANGEROUS BUSINESS. MANY RED FOXES LOSE THEIR LIVES TO VEHICLE COLLISIONS. IN SOME AREAS IT IS THE #1 CAUSE OF MORTALITY.

PANHANDLING IS A DANGEROUS WAY TO MAKE A LIVING FOR FOXES AND OTHER WILDLIFE IN NATIONAL PARKS. (THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN IN PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND NATIONAL PARK).

A FATHER FOX PANHANDLES ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD FOR FOOD, AS HIS YOUNG KIT WATCHES AND LEARNS. PANHANDLING IS A DANGEROUS WAY TO MAKE A LIVING FOR FOXES AND OTHER WILDLIFE IN NATIONAL PARKS. (THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN IN PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND NATIONAL PARK).

“I just wanted to get a photo”.

Your best photo ops will definitely not be of a fox chowing down on Doritos, cookies, or bread. As a wildlife photographer, I understand striving to capture that perfect moment. The best advice for this is simply to be patient, besides, capturing natural moments is far more rewarding. If you give wildlife their space, be respectful by not making them feel threatened, eventually they will carry on with their business like you are not even there. Wildlife doesn’t need to be fed in order obtain images of intimate moments. If anything, feeding wildlife will ruin your photographic opportunities. They will fill up on “junk food” and you will undoubtedly miss out on shooting natural behaviours such as hunting, playing, and interactions among one another.

A RED FOX LICKS THE ALUMINUM CAN OF A SWEET SOFT DRINK, THROWN ON THE GROUND BY A PASSING VEHICLE

Some species self-regulate their populations based on food accessibility.

The red fox is one of them. This means, fertility rates and birth rates are based on how much food is around. When plentiful, some species give birth to more kits. When humans interfere by creating a temporary false sense of abundance, especially during the tourist season, it offsets this balance. Leaving garbage out, leftover food, or purposely feeding wildlife creates an artificial food supply. After the tourist season is over, everyone packs up and leaves, there is no longer that leftover food or garbage to scavenge. If there isn’t a natural abundance of prey or food, this causes competition for resources and inevitably injury, starvation, and worst case death.

A FATHER FOX AND HIS KIT LOOK FOR HAND OUTS NEXT TO A "DO NOT FEED FOXES" SIGN AT A TRAIL HEAD IN PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND NATIONAL PARK.

"PROBLEM FOX IN THE AREA"

Human-wildlife conflict is probably one of the more popular issues with feeding.

Feeding wild animals teaches that people are food sources, which then causes them to lose their natural fear of humans. Without this fear, wildlife may approach people, coming too close for comfort, hoping for that handout. This behaviour can either irritate or frighten people, leading to complaints, relocation, or euthanasia of the animal deemed problematic. Feeding, especially by hand, amplifies the odds of someone getting bitten. When that occurs, it is almost always the animal that suffers the grim consequences. Putting yourself and the animal at risk for a momentary thrill is just plain irresponsible, and inconsiderate.

There are many negative ramifications of feeding wildlife for both humans and the wildlife. We hope that with the right education and community outreach the public will remember these consequences before making the short-sighted decision to offer a free handout. Wildlife can still be enjoyed in backyards and parks without feeding them; it opts for a safer alternative for people and wildlife alike.

THE CANID PROJECT contributors actively research and document human-canid relationships and both the positive and negative ramifications of these relationships. The project's aim, as a global creative conversation, is to document and share the stories of humans and the wild canids who enter each other's lives in some capacity. We actively present this information through our photography, creative non-fiction narrative, exhibits, talks, and community outreach to inspire and educate the public, as well as shed light on how these relationships shape our views on the wild canid species. If you would like to donate to this 501c3 non-profit to help further our efforts please click the donation button below, take one of our workshops, or visit our shop! Thank you!

Donate to The Canid Project's Educational Efforts

BRITTANY CROSSMAN PHOTOGRAPHS SOME OF THE URBAN FOXES FOR THE CANID PROJECT'S ARTICLE SERIES ON COEXISTENCE.

Coexisting with Urban Red Foxes: Why there Is No Other Option (Article Series)

With expanding urban sprawl in North America, encounters between wildlife and humans are occurring more frequently. Although habitat loss has reduced wildlife populations, destruction of wild lands is seldom the only reason why certain wildlife has moved into our backyards. The reasons for the increase in wildlife in many urban areas, and in particular red foxes for the purpose of this article, are more complex than simply wandering displaced animals looking for a new home. We will discuss some, but not all, of these reasons in this article.The scientific study of urban wildlife began only recently, but it’s a fast-growing field. Urban wildlife presents many challenges for wildlife management, while also providing great opportunity for education, outreach, and conservation. At this stage, coexistence seems the only viable solution; and having an educated public embrace this approach is the key to living in harmony.

AN URBAN FOX IN CANADA TROTS THROUGH A PARK IN THE CENTER OF TOWN. THE PARK ACTS AS A GREEN SPACE THAT PROVIDES COVER AND DEN SITES FOR URBAN RED FOXES.

First, some terminology.

Some wild animals are labeled ‘synanthropic species’. These species live near humans and directly benefit from human-altered environments like gardens, garbage dumps, and farms. Such areas provide critical resources such as cover (think sheds, under porches, barns), and food (for example, bird feeders, our garbage, the rodents attracted to our garbage, and non-native garden plants that provide fruit year round). Examples of synanthropic species are raccoons, skunks, foxes, coyotes, and certain rodents. These species have learned how to exploit human-created habitats, and they thrive in a mosaic of suburbs and cities next to woodlots and fields, which provides some distance from humans, but also the close proximity that benefits them as well.

The red fox is also known as an ‘edge species’, which means they naturally occur at the borders between two habitat types, which is called an 'ecotone'. These ecotones, such as woodlands transitioning into grasslands,offer them different resources that they need to survive, which is why red foxes do not select just woodlands as their habitat. Water sources and corridors, like creeks, are also important in habitat selection. Den sites are usually found within at least 1 to 2 miles of a water source. As we will see below, humans have created habitats very similar (gardens and yards that back up to brushy or densely forested areas as an example) to their natural habitat; our human-modified environments mimic the transition zones of these selected habitats.

Why aren't red foxes true forest species and why do they prefer a transitional zone of two habitats?

As mentioned earlier, it’s a common misconception that the reason we see an influx of foxes and coyotes in our suburbs and cities is because we have supplanted their woodland homes with our development. Although habitat loss for some species is a real issue that has forced animals from their territories, synanthropic species, like the red fox, are seldom true forest animals by nature, but rather “edge species”. But why? With red foxes it has a lot to do with their primary prey.

Red foxes are opportunistic omnivores but they are primarily hunters of rodents, such as mice and voles, which live in grassy fields. In addition, insects, rabbits, hare, and birds also make up their menu; these species tend to favor the shrubby and weedy edges between forest and fields. However, red foxes also require cover and den sites that may not be available in open areas. Forests, with dense brush at its edge and hollow logs offer possible den sites and shelter. Therefore, where forest meets grassland is the ideal natural environment for the red fox. Similarly, a neighborhood with human shelters, creeks and ponds, corridors (like a road, railroad or ditches) they can travel to get from one habitat patch to another, lawns, fields of grass meeting the edge of a fragmented forested area or green space, basically provides the same resources that a natural ecocene of forest and grassland provides. And they have an added bonus of even more food resources by staying close to humans: our food waste and the rodents it attracts.

So what does all this have to do with why they are in my town?

The conclusion is that through our own expansion, city developments, and agricultural practices we have created an induced ecotone that mimics in many ways the natural ecotones where red foxes are found naturally in the wild. Human-modified areas often provide a mosaic of habitats: grass and fields where they can hunt, ditches, parks with trees and fragmented woodlands that provide cover and safety, corridors, and even denning opportunities in our green spaces and sometimes under our sheds and houses (Note: it is thought that Red Foxes may prefer a more natural setting away from high human traffic for dens, unless the lack of resources or green space is high, then they will be more likely to den under/in human infrastructure). And of course as mentioned previously, don't forget that living among humans, or in close proximity to humans, means even more food resources via our trash and the rodents drawn to it.

It's no wonder the red fox is drawn to such human-disturbed areas. And, it's no wonder they are here to stay.

Click on photos to see larger version, mouse over to read captions:

A YOUNG FOX IN CANADA EMERGES AT DUSK IN AN ECOTONAL AREA OF GREEN SPACE AND HUMAN MAINTAINED ROADS AND LOTS.

A RED FOX HUNTS IN AN OPEN GRASSY FIELD, WHICH IS PART OF THEIR HABITAT SELECTION DUE TO THE FACT THAT THESE AREAS ARE FAVORED BY THEIR PRIMARY PREY.

A CROSS FOX KIT PEEKS OUT FROM HIS DEN SITE, A MANMADE WOOD PILE.

BOOKS AND TEXTS REFERENCED FOR THIS ARTICLE:

Red Fox: The Catlike Canine by J. David Henry

Behavior of North American Mammals by Elbroch and Rinehart

The origin of recently established red fox populations in the United States: translocations or natural range expansions?, Journal of Mammalogy, 93(1):52–65, 2012

THIS ARTICLE IS ONE OF FOUR IN OUR CURRENT SERIES: Coexisting with Urban Red Foxes: Why there Is No Other Option

So now that we know why they are here and that they are here to stay, be sure to check back for Article Two of this series:Public Concerns About Red Foxes: Debunking the Myths. In this upcoming article we will debunk the most common myths, explain the pros of having red foxes in our towns, and take a look at the larger picture so we can understand why we must embrace the idea of coexistence.

DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR US ABOUT RED FOXES? IF SO, FILL OUT THE FORM BELOW AND WE WILL INCLUDE THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS IN THIS NEW SERIES:

I’m going to get straight to the point. I want to talk about the responsibilities we have to the wildlife with whom we share our immediate surroundings. Yes, I mean the raccoons we hear arguing in our back gardens at night, and the opossums playing dead in our accidentally open trash cans outside, and the ghostly red streak we see shooting in front of our car as we drive home on a dark evening (that we somehow know is a fox), and the coyotes singing us serenades at twilight.

I hear people often express in exasperated voices how they cannot believe they are seeing foxes or “so many” raccoons in their neighborhood. They can’t believe they live in a city and feel these animals should not be there - in the city - as well. They would rather see those wild animals in the woods where they “belong” - as if cities have always been here and these wild animals are encroaching on us, with their trees and forests. There is a disconnect in such statements. I think it comes from just not knowing the facts or from blindly believing untruths that were passed down over the years. I am mostly optimistic and feel that if people are exposed to the facts, they will see the flaws in those statements.

The first truth I want to discuss (as far as the United States is concerned) is this: the four animals mentioned above have actually benefitted from human expansion, and there are reasons they will hang around the edges, in suburbs, in small towns, and in large cities. They are even labeled "edge species", and for good reason. They learned early on that our villages, towns, and large cities provide a lot of food via our trash and the rodents that are drawn to it. That is a fact and not much is going to change that. We’ve inadvertently produced perfect conditions for these edge species to thrive!

Another fact is that removing a wild animal from a suburban or urban area, whether a single raccoon or ten raccoons, or a whole fox family, does not solve anything. What actually happens when a trapper removes an animal? Well, with his trap and animal in hand, he leaves your property and has also left a vacancy for another individual animal to occupy. If the local population of that species is healthy, another individual will fill that vacancy, sometimes overnight but certainly sooner or later. Therefore, it’s only a matter of time before you’ll notice another “pesky” critter that will “need” to be removed. Rinse and repeat.

Some people may not care much about where the wild animals they have had removed from their properties end up, but I’m sure most do to some degree. Some people may turn a blind eye and just tell themselves it was released in the woods miles away and that all is ok. After all, ignorance is bliss. But, you need to know that is rarely the case.

For instance, in some states if a coyote is trapped, the trapper has only two legal choices: euthanize it, or, if he has the proper permits, sell it to a coyote pen operation. It’s often the same for red foxes. I hear the going rate is a hundred dollars a head where I live. So, the trapper can euthanize the coyote and get nothing in return or for a hundred bucks, he can sell a coyote to a person who will put it in a penned-in property, where it will be chased and terrorized by competing hunting dogs with no place to hide and no way to escape. These competitions can last days. The coyotes and foxes will be ran to such exhaustion that they will often give up after a few hours, too tired to run anymore. At that point, the hunting dogs are more able to kill the exhausted coyote or fox (although not legally-but can you imagine trying to call off dogs from a target that is helpless in front of them?). In other words, these animals are possibly doomed to a cruel and grisly death, or at the very least a tormented existence.

Ok, so maybe now you can see that trapping and "relocating" isn’t the best idea, and in some instances - with coyotes especially – we are inadvertently producing more coyotes by culling them. For more information on this “rebound effect” see these articles below:

Maybe now you “get it”, but you still aren’t so keen with the idea of foxes or coyotes in your yard or garden. You may be wondering what one can do humanely to discourage wild canids from visiting their yards and gardens. Heck, you may be on the opposite end of the spectrum and wonder what you can do to encourage nightly visits from our wild friends (I’ll give you a hint: it is NEVER to feed them).

CLICK ON PHOTOS TO SEE LARGER VERSION:

So, let’s talk about what one can do to encourage or discourage wildlife from one’s property, and do so in ethical and humane ways that won’t upset your neighbors, as some may likely share your same views, but some will also have differing opinions. How can we all coexist with the least amount of conflict?

Why feeding wildlife is not the best idea:

In the United States there’s a reason we see ‘DO NOT FEED THE WILDLIFE’ signs in city parks, on nature trails, and in national parks. For starters, feeding wildlife causes animals to lose their natural fear of humans. Although this may be fun for you, it is ultimately a selfish act. Is your feeding habit inadvertently putting the animal in danger? Are you causing these animals to cross roads they wouldn’t need to cross otherwise so they can have a tasty treat in your yard?

How do your neighbors feel about them? There will likely be some neighbors who are not so keen on having wild animals in their yards, or the leftover food cached in their gardens. The same neighbor or, maybe another one, might get frightened by a wild animal that approaches them for a handout, because it will begin to associate humans with food. Often, feeding wildlife ends badly for the animal and can make a naturally elusive animal one that is a brazen nuisance. I’ve heard all too many times the story of the disgruntled neighbor calling animal control to have the “nuisance” animal removed. Some may even leave poison out, which then endangers all animals, not just the target animal. I recently heard a story of a man in a neighborhood, only 20 minutes away from where I live, shooting coyotes out his bathroom window after he lured them to his yard with raw meat.

If food is overly plentiful due to “supplemental” feedings from humans, animals like foxes and coyotes will not disperse as they normally would in the late summer and early fall in the wild. This can cause a larger population density in a smaller area, which can result in injuries, sometimes even death, as they fight over food and territory. It also increases the likelihood of transmission of disease due to unnatural crowding.

Diseases, viruses and parasites can easily and quickly spread from animal to animal as they gather to feed in abnormally crowded conditions. If you are feeding a fox, then you are also likely attracting feral cats, raccoons, opossums, rats, etc.

Feeding wild animals from cars makes them less scared of vehicles, which just increases the chances for them to be hurt or killed in a collision.

Last, they don’t need us! Enjoy wildlife from a distance. It’s much more rewarding to observe them in their natural behavioral state. Perhaps try your hand at wildlife photography or get some binoculars.

What you can do instead of feeding wildlife to make your yard wildlife friendly:

Do not use rodent poison or traps! You can kill or hurt other wildlife or roaming pets in the process.

Plant native plants. Adapted to local conditions, natives require little care, and the insects and fruit that they produce increase populations of the prey species used by the “edge” species, all of which occasionally themselves eat insects and fruit . Staying native provides seasonal food that these animals eat in the wild. And when it’s not seasonally available, the animals will move on, as they do in the wild, to find food elsewhere. For more info, see: http://www.audubon.org/content/why-native-plants-matter

Keep chickens/rabbits in good strong enclosures that are predator proof.

I am a firm believer in the possibility of true coexistence with our wild neighbors. It's time now for a paradigm shift in the way we view predators; the recent science tells us so. It's time to look at the world and its inhabitants as a whole, with every action affecting a part of that whole, not as single, isolated, and disconnected features outside of ourselves.

How You Can Help

The Canid Project is a young organization just getting its true start in 2017. We are a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. Our educational endeavors, future projects, and our brand new Louisiana state-permitted fox rescue and rehabilitation facility are run entirely on public donations. Please consider donating to our cause: